Cloning

4 Pages 1103 Words

Cloning
Is cloning necessary for advancements in improving the quality of life? Is cloning necessary for advancements in improving the quality of life? People often question whether or not we as a scientific nation are trying to play the role of God. Many people say that we should not try to interfere with nature. That is fine if in everyday life we did not try to change our habitat every single second of every single day. More than likely at one point and time the land on which your house sits was covered by a pasture of woodlands. That is interference. If we try to clone organs for transplant patients that are in their final hour then we are actually improving their life. If improvement in the quality of life is playing God, then is that necessarily a bad thing? Do we have the right to clone? We are all guaranteed rights by the fact that we are human beings. Those rights include the right to pursue areas of scientific study. Not many people vocalized his or her disapproval of space exploration. At the time that there was no talk of how morally wrong Neil Armstrong’s walk on the moon was going to be. They could have argued the fact we are created on earth we must stay here and not interfere with things beyond our comprehension. If they did, and the program did not lift off, then we would not have some of the technologies that we have today. Cloning can only yield new technologies that will be beneficial to society. One misconception that many people have is that this technology can fall into the "wrong hands". We could not clone a person of history to be the same person that he or she was before. If we were to do that then it would be near impossible to reproduce the same character. They would like any other ordinary human; they would be conceived, developed, and then born as all other babies. They would have the same appearance and genetic makeup as their equal. This does not mean that they would have the same mental capacity as t...